[geo-discuss] compressed version of the analysis of second reading amendments

Rufus Pollock rufus.pollock at okfn.org
Tue Mar 14 09:40:25 UTC 2006

Jo Walsh wrote:
> Amendment 2 (right to "view" public geodata) + 
> The Council common position tried to remove the right of European
> citizens to view geographic data free of cost. This amendment
> reinstates that right in the preamble. Amendment 21 which restores
> that right in the Articles, thus accepting Amendment 2 implies
> accepting Amendment 21. 


> Amendment 5 (How data covered by existing "intellectual property
> rights" will be exempted from coverage by the terms of INSPIRE) - 

Summaries as 'statement-like' and factual (i.e. non-normative) as 
possible. So here should delete 'How'.

>     22(a) The provisions of this Directive do not affect the existence or
>     ownership of public sector authorities' intellectual property rights 
>     This is an amendment to the recital which adds a clause in favour of
>     allowing intellectual property rights to exempt public geodata from
>     the requirements of INSPIRE. 

Assume section from 'This is an amendment to ' would be untabbed. 
Suggest 'to the recital' -> 'to recital 22'

> Amendment 9 (qualifying how INSPIRE relates to 2003/4/EC) + 

-> Qualification of relation of INSPIRE to 2003/4/EC

> This amendment changes the wording of Article 2 which discusses how
> INSPIRE relates to 2003/04/EC, the Directive on public access to
> environmental information. 
>     This Directive is without prejudice to Directives 2003/4/EC save where
>     otherwise provided
> 2003/4/EC describes situations in which public requests for access to
> state-collected environmental information can be refused. One of those
> cases is that of intellectual property rights in state-collected,
> taxpayer-funded data.  For where otherwise provided, we have to look
> at the change which is covered in Amendment 18. Amendments 9 and 18
> work as a pair. 

add at end something like: 'work as a pair and serve to prevent the 
existence of intellectual property rights being used to prevent access 
to state-collected geodata'

> Amendment 18 (against limiting access to discovery services) + 

-> Prevent limitation of access to discovery services

> This amendment reinstates wording to INSPIRE that was proposed by the
> Commission and removed by the Council. The addition in the amendment
> is the following: 
>     By way of derogation from Article 11(1) of this Directive 
> to read in the amended version:  
>     By way of derogation from Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/4/EC and
>     Article 11 of this Directive
> Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/4/EC provides a list of exceptions
> which allow data providers to refuse public requests for public data.
> These include commercial interest and intellectual property rights in
> the data. Where 2003/4/EC allows agencies to refuse the public access
> to their data, this amendment means that INSPIRE should guarantee that
> this data can at least be searched for and viewed, even if not made
> available for download. 
> This amendment becomes a lot stronger if Amendment 19 is also
> accepted.


> Amendment 19 (removing clause whereby intellectual property rights
> mean data is not subject to INSPIRE rules) + 

-> Prevent existence of intellectual property rights excluding data from 
being subject to INSPIRE rules

>     (e) intellectual property rights
> This is an amendment to delete the clause added by the Council which
> covers exemptions  allowing public agencies to refuse access to data
> available through INSPIRE. If this amendment is not approved, then any
> agency which has currently commercial copyright over its data will be

delete currently

> under no obligation to share it, on either a fee or free basis. 
> Amendment 21 (both searching and viewing of public geodata should be
> free of cost) +

-> (?) Search of and access to public geodata to be free of cost

> This is a crucial amendment which deletes the clause added by the
> Council whereby existing licensing terms and costs can prevent public
> access to geodata. The Council's extra clause states that "view
> services" can be exempted from the terms of INSPIRE where 
> in cases where charges or licenses are an essential precondition for
> maintaining the spatial data sets and services... Member States may
> apply charges and/or licenses either to the person providing the
> service to the public, or, where the service provider chooses, to the
> public itself. 

I would delete insert of council's clause and just leave the summary.

> Amendment 22 (view services should be made freely available) +

Viewing services will be made freely available

> Where the Council version reads, in regards to view, download and
> transformation services, 
>     Such services may be covered by disclaimers, click-licenses or
>     licenses
> This amendment removes the reference to licenses, shortening Article
> 14(3) just to read disclaimers or click-licenses. 

This seems pretty minor (what is the difference between licenses and 
click-licenses). Also the actual subject matter does not seem that 
directly related to the summary (view services should be made freely 

> Amendment 27 (deletion of clause on preserving "intellectual property
> rights" coming before data sharing) +

-> Clarify priority of data sharing and access rights vs. intellectual 
property rights

> This deletes a clause added by the Council which offers intellectual
> property rights as a get-out clause against making data available
> under Article 17:
>     This Article does not affect the existence or ownership of public
>     sector authorities' intellectual property rights.



More information about the geo-discuss mailing list